They can say that HIV causes flu-like symptoms after the initial infection but that doesn't mean that they ever proved it. The standard of proof has been inverted. Anyone who claims superpowers and impossibilities for AIDS is held to no standard of evidence. Anyone who dismisses those claims, you've seen what the Monkey has to say about that. The claim that HIV caused some symptoms after the initial "infection" did not come until the promoters of HIV disease had spent years saying that AIDS caused no symptoms until later. The promoters offered little and no real evidence that it caused disease later, also. Their one big piece of evidence was the fact that an antibody test would come up positive in some people. Duesberg used to talk himself blue in the face about the fact that it wasn't proven that this even meant that the virus was there, but to counter him the promoters came up with a lot of meaningless rhetoric and stories about how millions of people were dying and they didn't have time to do the science right so we should all just play ball. The promoters were saying that the presence of the antibodies proved the presence of the virus when they didn't have any evidence that this was the case, when they couldn't culture the virus, literally making the claim that they knew that this was the case when they didn't have the means to prove it, and when they had no other example to prove that a virus was still active in the system when antibodies were present. All of the rest of their evidence that the virus was doing anything was in the "symptoms" that the patients had, and there is ample evidence that those "symptoms" were caused by drugs, both recreational and prescription. There was never a need to say that the virus must be making those people sick when they were overmedicated with drugs that were known to make people sick. In the other known examples the virus was present when the illness was present, and there were symptoms distinct from those caused by drugs. AZT is a drug that was so destructive that it was deemed to poisonous to use to treat cancer. Prednisone suppresses the immune system badly enough to cause pneumonia in its users. What part of this is difficult to understand? People who take "powerful" medications for long periods of time get sick. This was known before "AIDS" was a term. Many articles ran in many journals about the fact that medications like Prednisone were overused. Part of the problem is that when doctors see a "marker" or they see one or two symptoms of the collection of symptoms they presume the rest and ignore evidence to the contrary.